About your Search

20130106
20130114
SHOW
( more )
STATION
MSNBCW 64
CSPAN 35
CSPAN2 31
CNNW 30
MSNBC 14
KQED (PBS) 12
LINKTV 9
KGO (ABC) 7
KNTV (NBC) 6
KRCB (PBS) 6
CNBC 5
FBC 5
SFGTV 4
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 296
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 298 (some duplicates have been removed)
the atlantic council, which is about as mainstream an organization as you will get in foreign policy. >> mm-hmm. >> and we've worked with him a great deal through the atlantic council. he is a realist. he is not from the lindsey graham school of foreign policy but rather from the brent scowcroft school of foreign policy. the dr. brzezinski school of foreign policy, the colin powell school of foreign policy, the george h.w. bush school of foreign policy, the james baker iii school of foreign policy. so if anybody out there wants to say that chuck hagel is outside the mainstream of foreign policy, i suggest they turn the mirror around on them because i suggest anybody saying that of the guy that's running the atlantic council and is from the realist school of colin powell, james baker iii, george h.w. bush, brent scowcroft, zig nbig brzezinski. >> i should point out that i've known him for decades, and he's a friend of the family. so obviously this comes from that point of view as well. i want to get to the bill kristol part of this, alex, and then go to andrea. >> can we get andrea first? >>
, the headlines this morning about president obama's foreign policy agenda for 2013 -- we want to hear from you -- what are the challenges in 2013 on the foreign-policy front? the numbers are on your screen. send us a tweet or post your comments on facebook. also send us an e-mail. we are getting your reaction today to the nominations put out by the white house yesterday. president obama had a news conference to put forth chuck hegel as well as the john brennan. to head the cia. also, there are the headlines in the newspapers of syria, iran, peace in the middle east, etc so we want to get your take -- what to you think of foreign policy issues in 2013? here is some comments on our facebook page -- what is your take on this? we will get to your comments in a minute. the front page of "the washington post "- here is the front page of the huffington post this morning -- these are all the headlines in the huffington post this morning. about the nomination of chuck hagel for that position. the financial times this morning -- >> we go to missouri, a democratic caller -- caller: i am loving it. i am g
for the direction of their foreign policy. there are realists and chuck hagel comes from that camp. and then there are the neo-conservatives, lindsey graham start from south carolina, bill kristol more of that camp. chuck hagel opposed the surge in iraq quite vocally in 2007 and for that he has been seen as a bit an outlier in foreign policy republican foreign policy circles. we're going to see this play out in the next several weeks. >> john: let's talk about the specific controversy. what is chuck hagel's specific record when it comes to israel. >> he has been a long and historyic supporter. he has voted for sanctions against iran and advocateed for diplomat i canic approaches. this mirrors what the american people want. he has consistently supported aide to israel's military and he has great credibility amongst israeli leadership and even the israeli government said last night they don't want to get in the middle of this fight. this is something for the american people to decide, but his record with israel, and we'll see during these hearings will come out and it will be very st
not begin his career as a foreign policy apostate, in 2002, he voted for the iraq war. he wanted to tear up the missile treaty we have with russia to build a missile defense shield, and put boots on the ground in kosovo, which was at the edge of the extreme hawkishness. like many in the country, though relatively few in the congress, hagel was changed about the iraq war, he became a cautious critic and ended as an angry opponent. he ended a changed man or at least a changed foreign policy thinker. it was not just the iraq war he began to question by the end. it was the republican party's entire turn towards the unilateral, the very idea that america had the idea to topple the multiple dictators. this is what makes hagel so important, he is one of the few who is changed by iraq. he goes on to write "what the republican foreign policy establishment fears is that with hagel as secretary of defense it will become impossible for obama to minimize the dangers of war with iraq." hagel will be what colin powell was in the '90s, the military man who reminds the colleagues at war, once unleashed can'
to as superstaffers. instead president obama is sending a different message, at least through his foreign policy vision national security appo t appointme appointments. for the first time, two vietnam veterans whose cautious approach was shaped by service in that war. chuck hagel and john kerry, they're going to lead u.s. national security policy. president tried to preempt criticism of hagel yesterday, in fact, by selling that biography. almost daring critics to vote against someone who had given so much to this country. >> to this day, chuck bears the scars and the shrapnel from battles he fought in our name. chuck knows that war is not an abstraction. he understands that sending young americans to fight and bleed in the dirt and mud u that's something we only do when it's absolutely necessary. >> that message may be aimed at potential critics, like another vietnam veteran, senator john mccain who hagel split with over the troop surge in iraq. who responded to hagel's nomination saying, "i have serious concerns about positions senator hagel has taken on a range of critical national security i
not just party orthodoxy but out of the mainstream foreign policy establishment. >> rose: we conclude with a conversation about politics and economics and debt ceilings and fiscal cliffs and sequestration with david leonhardt of the "new york times" and austan goolsbee, former chairman of the president's council of economic advisors. >> there's much less of a sense in obama that he can get the grand bargain. although he's still trying. he and boehner both are. i think he's much more cynical about what republicans will agree to and i think he's come to think that many of them won't do anything with him. >> rose: national security, politics, and the economy when we continue. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. poop announced his picks for two of the most important national security positions earlier today. for secretary of defense he nominated former republican senator chuck hagel. he chose counterterrorism advisor john brennan to head the c.i.a.. >> chuck hagel is the leader that our troops deserve. he is an american patr
, a look at his evolving foreign policy and national security policy, mark halperin of "time" magazine and washington david sanger of the "new york times." david, let me begin with you and talk about what does this -- these choices say about the president and how he sees the challenge of national security over the next four years? >>ell, charlie, i think that in the selection of john brennan, who, as you said, has been his counterterrorism chief and many people believe has essentially run the entire intelligence community, you have seen the president choose somebody who is central to the president's light footprint strategy. that is the strategy of not getting involved in the world through these big attritional wars in which we send 100,000, 200,000 troops into iraq and afghanistan but instead the man who helped shape president obama's concept that with a combination of drones, cyber warfare, special forces you can actually go out and defend america's interest without staying inside countries, without trying to rewire them. but i think that you'll find that both these men, both mr. bre
to ready about religion and taxes. talk a little bit about foreign-policy. what did the founders that you talk about in your book have to say about america's role in the world? >> guest: i think again, this was a matter of great dispute. there was major foreign-policy issue in the washington administration and that was a war between france and england and what they were going to do about it. and even then, you had two very distinctive positions. hamilton was roughly pro-british and jefferson was roughly pro-french and this is what really led to the huge split between those two men. the national bank issue is controversial, but this was how the party the federalist and republicans alliance was whether they would favor britain nor france in that war that would eventually produce all sorts of other things. i think that the hamiltonian decision which washington accepted was that america ought to be neutral because it had no army, it had no navy. it didn't have money at the time. it had a strong interest in trade with both england and france, and just they seek machiavellian self-interest that
are with foreign policy with conferences and publications, anyway we are pleased to have this occasion and have a discussion about the subjects that are in the book for foreign policy. [applause] >> thank you steve. you instrumental to make this project have been. also oxford university press that published the book and also to my:editor catherine and the people here at the foundation also jonathan who helped to make the book possible. the reason it was necessary storming off the stage from 1970's of the insurgent movement is important yet at the same time that is less well understood. and we had the great bull of on the taliban but we wanted to focus how did they develop after 9/11? we have one dozen chapters in the book and those on stage you contributed in those two writing a book that chapter with the taliban insurgency as it relates to the condo tarry taliban without movement to negotiate with the afghan government were not followed up. also the professor at national defence university and at columbia and that a high ranking pakistan a police official that now has the political scene when
of steam. that he's very well regarded on issues of foreign policy. the republicans are used to holding an advantage on that mantle, have lost it to an extent. so they just want to pick a fight. >> so what do you think, perry? you know, at what point does this become very serious? i mean, we're reporting this morning possibly as many as ten democrats who are considering whether to vote for him. >> i think that a number of democrats will be different when the hearing actually starts. after that i actually don't think this is about obama particularly opposition. a lot of republicans don't like chuck hagel. chuck hagel for years now has criticized the iraq war. he's criticized virtually every view john mccain has had about foreign policy. and john mccain's a leading figure in the republican party on foreign policy. so it's not surprising to me. what you have to see is how well the white house defends this pick. right now this is a pick that doesn't have a lot of friends on either side of the party. ultimately democrats are going to listen to what barack obama says about his own cabinet. an
shows. what this comes down to is the future of obama's foreign policy. chuck hagel in many ways represents the clearest break yet by this administration from the george w. bush era foreign policy. keep in mind the president continued a lot of these bush era programs. we haven't really had a substantive comprehensive conversation about what went wrong in iraq. chuck hagel's nomination represents a clean break. i think that's very scary for a lot of these neocons. >> let me go to peter. i have always respected the way your brain works. you think a lot, which is a good thing for a writer to do occasionally is to think. you think and you really change your mind, which is very refreshing. and i think you've wrestled with these issues of the middle east, and i guess the question is if you get hagel in there, aren't you basically getting barack obama with a war record? what's the difference between barack obama and hagel? >> i think the difference between barack obama and hagel is that hagel says publicly some of the things that barack obama only thinks privately. and hagel would be to
and he as the white house try to push back against critics of his foreign policy views. this morning, someone who supports the hagel nomination, the former secretary of state, general colin powell, here to speak exclusively to us. general powell, good morning, welcome back to the program. >> good morning, david. good to be here. >> i want to start on chuck hagel. why do you think he should be confirmed? >> i think there are a number of reasons. first, i think he has had a very, very distinguished public service record that he can stand on. there are a lot of comments about different things he said over the years and i think he will have a chance to respond to all those comments as the confirmation hearings. but it might be useful just to stand back and take a look at this man overall a young man who volunteered to go to vietnam. they wanted to send him to europe, a nice, safe, place, he wanted to go to vietnam. he and his brother went. they were both wounded, he was wounded twice. came back to vietnam, went to school on the gi bill, veterans administration. from there went to other t
on most issues regarding foreign policy. >> out of the mainstream. is that how he is regarded in washington, d.c.? >> well, i don't want to get into a debate with lindsey who i happen to be a huge fan of. i think he's one of the strongest members of the senate. but the president has chosen chuck hagel or is, i guess, going to choose chuck hagel. and chuck hagel isn't going to be working for himself. he's not going to be freelancing as a senator as he was when he made these misstatements which i suspect have upset senator graham and other members of the senate who might be concerned about some of the things he said in the past. he'll be working for the president. when working for the president you follow the president's policies. i don't see this prior statement as being -- first off, they may -- they may have been wrong. he may have made some statements which were inappropriate, as he did. but everybody does, i guess. and now he's going to be working for the president. and carrying the president's policies forward. i think he'll probably carry them forward rather effectively.
. >> schmidt is a friend of mine, interested in foreign policy. this is not a google trip. he is interested in foreign policy. i am sure he is interested in the economic issues there and the social media aspect. this is why we have teamed up on this trip. >> the u.s. state department is criticizing the google chairman's timing and the visit comes weeks after a controversial north korean rocket launch. >> the fog just hanging tough for us this morning and visibility was low. did you encounter anything? >> take a look outside behind us. >> very impressive. barely see the bay bridge. usually it is the golden gate. >> now, other areas to show you what is going on. this is an area where it is so thick this morning, highway 87, down in the south bay and san jose now you can see a lost filtered sunshine out there and one more aspect, you can see some of the haze hanging around and that is moisture coming in and that is, along with the warm air that is moving over this cold, damp land that is creating that, we will have hazy and filtered sunshine. a beautiful picture there. now, live doppler 7 hd s
dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam. >> the tv campaign against him started when his nomination was just a rumor. >> chuck hagel is not a responsible option. >> opponents claim he is anti- israeli, even anti-semitic. he once opposed the appointment of an ambassador, criticized -- criticizing him for being openly, aggressively gay. >> good morning. how are you? >> he says critics have distorted his cues. -- his views. >> i like chuck hagel. he is out of the mainstream of thinking on most issues regarding foreign policy. >> he has lined up another conflict with congress. >> for more on today's announcement, i will speak with the chief washington correspondent for the new york times. he is the author of confront and conceal. thank you for coming in. what is it about chuck hagel that some republicans seem to dislike? >> a lot of it goes back to the days of the iraq war. the voted for the resolution in 2002. he was one of the first republicans to say, this is not working and the u.s. should get out. he opposed the surge in 2008. that alienate him from the bush administ
for an emperor of other issues that will be discussed about the administration approach to foreign policy. this nomination will carry the weight or burden that other issues will not carry because of issues around his nomination. not justice, but the administration's position -- not just his, but the administration's position on iran and other issues. >> colby is exactly right, and that is why hearings are important. we are focused on whether they get a yes or no, but foreign policy is in area where obama is independent of the congress. he has a free hand, so you get a national discussion on those events. this is a good time, particularly since hagel is, as the "washington post" editorial- page, which is not exactly right wing, said, "hagel is a republican in name only." on these issues he is to the left not only of republicans, but obama. it is not a centrist appointment. it will allow the senate and republicans to have an open debate, which we ought to have, on where republican wants to go on and a second term, on iran, israel, and defense spending and a particular. >> next, the looming
foreign policy. chavez maintains a close strategic relationship with his neighbors and is hailed as a benefactor by the countries to which he sells oil at discount rates. problems remain on the domestic front. venezuela still imports more than 2/3 of the foodstuffs it requires. in 2011, inflation was at 27%, and the country's foreign debt has risen from $35 billion in 2002 to more than $66 billion today. after his latest election -- reelection, hugo chavez vowed to continue his socialist revolution, but it is uncertain weather his health will allow him to return to office. >> for more on this now, we are joined by a representative from the iberian institute. the opposition appears to have accepted the supreme court verdict. did this surprise you? >> it does not really surprise me because the imposition is not very strong. chavez got almost 60% of the vote, and the opposition also plost regional elections in december. so there's no real opposition to force in venezuela. it would be very difficult for the opposition to really dispute the supreme court decision yesterday. >> a criti
aggressive foreign policy toward latin america and its allies like columbia has fostered regional pride and assertiveness across latin america. >> if the yankee imperialists promoted and armed aggression against venezuela, i updated it from colombian territory or from wherever, we would simply suspend oil deliveries to the united states. we would do that even if we have to eat stones. than not oil plays a key role in venezuelas foreign policy. chavez maintains a close strategic relationship with his neighbors and is hailed as a benefactor by the countries to which he sells oil at discount rates. problems remain on the domestic front. venezuela still imports more than 2/3 of the foodstuffs it requires. in 2011, inflation was at 27%, and the country's foreign debt has risen from $35 billion in 2002 to more than $66 billion today. after his latest election -- reelection, hugo chavez vowed to continue his socialist revolution, but it is uncertain weather his health will allow him to return to office. >> for more on this now, we are joined by a representative from the iberian institute. the
in moving people to see some of the backroom dealings of u.s. foreign policy. it has exposed people to think harder. i do think it played a role in leading people in tunisia and egypt to look at some of the cables and see what people already knew in their gut the soccer field in wikileaks about the alliances between u.s. foreign policy with the most repressive elements in those countries. let's hope that changes as the uprisings continue. anytime you can learn more about what is being done in our name, it is critical. that is part of what transparency is about. the freedom of information act is still not working well under the obama administration. some of that is pos/t 9/11. in los war will lead to a decline in information transparency access. anytime you can have less sequence -- secrecy, that is good. less secrecy is needed. it was handled at the outset by partnering with newspapers like "the guardian," traditional newspapers of distinction. wikileaks released documents around the world to newspapers in india, haiti, the middle east, latin america. it has had an impact in countries we do
the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam. >> president obama agreed with senator hagel in 2007. >> this continues to be a disastrous foreign policy mistake. we are now confronted with the question, how do we clean up the mess and make the best out of a situation in which there are no good options. >> are we going to continue to invest in american blood and treasure at the same rate we are doing now? >> the troops largely allowed the u.s. military to turn the war around and end the war in iraq for good in december of 2011. today the president said that his views were shaped in vietnam. >> when his brother was injured by a mine, chuck risked his life to pull him to safety. to this day he bears the scars from battles he fought in our name. >> in 2008 he traveled to afghanistan, iraq, kuwait and jordan with then candidate obama and went toe to toe defending him against the presidential nominee john mccain. >> i think john is treading on very thin ground here. >> his views remain an open wound for this freshman congressman who served in iraq and afghanista
to this eight-year mess that was george w bush's foreign policy. at the white house, president obama met with afghanistan's president and he made a big announcement. we achieved our central goal, or have come very close to achieving our central goal, which is to decapacity al-qaida to make sure that they can't attack us again. by the end of next year, 2014, the transition will be complete. afghans will have full responsibility for their security. and this war will come to a responsible end. >> yes, a reduced role for u.s. troops will start this spring. after more than 4,000 days of combat, it is close to being over. no more of the arrogant attack first neocon fantasy. it's why the nomination of chuck hagel matters. the president is taking the bush doctrine and kicking it out the door. a historic stamp. joining me now is former congressman patrick murphy, democrat from pennsylvania. he's the first iraq war veteran elected to congress. and nia malika henderson, first, let me thank you both for being here tonight. congressman, you've been long for a pullout. we should have never extended it
's foreign policy. at the white house, he met with the president of afghanistan and made a big announcement. >> we achieved our central goal, which is, or have come very close to achieving our central goal, which is to decapacitate al-qaeda, to make sure they can't attack us again. by next year, 2014, the transition will be complete. afghans will have full responsibility for their security, and this war will come to a responsible end. >> yes, a reduced role for the u.s. troops will start this spring. at the more than 4,000 -- after more than 4,000 days of combat it is past time for this to be over. we're a step closer to undoing the reckless policy that bush-cheney left us. no more idea that diplomacy is for weak people, no more idea that the secretary of defense, chuck hagel matters. the president has taken the bush doctrine and kicked it out the door. an historic stamp that president obama is putting on american foreign policy. joining me now is former congressman pat murphy, democrat from pennsylvania. he is the first iraq war veteran collected to congress, and political reporter for "th
of foreign policy. what is foreign policy? >> guest: well, it's -- the fp group is a division of washington post that publishes foreign policy magazine. the foreign policy web site which is now much bigger than the magazine, we have almost three-and-a-half million visitor a month to the web site and run a series of events and other programs on international issues. >> host: mr. rothkopf, in "power, inc." you have a chapter, a chapter about a swedish goat. what is that story? >> guest: well, i wanted to go back to sort of the origin story of the company and, of course, companies of one form or another have existed since the beginning of time. but the oldest corporation that's still in existence is a swedish company that started perhaps a thousand years ago when a goat wandered away from its owner and came back with red horns because it had drunk from a treatment that was full of copper ore. and the owner came back and found the stream and started digging for copper, and that became a copper company and became a company called -- [inaudible] which means great copper mountain. and it's now a c
? >> with respect to what he ultimately called a huge foreign policy blunder? >> he -- that's his characterization and if people want to challenge his characterization, they will have that opportunity. >> in your judgment, was he wrong on iraq? >> i would not have called it that h i would have said i think the president had more than sufficient basis to believe there were weapons of mass destruction that were a danger to the world and possibility of those weapons going to terrorists. and so, he undertook military action. i think that was the correct thing to do and it was well supported by the intelligence. i think we did not execute the operation well. once baghdad fell. >> there w-- once baghdad fell, was a feeling that was the end of it. it was not. it was just the beginning for it. >> he was controversial for comments he made gays, add said about a ambassadorial nominee during the clinton administration, he was aggressively gay and detract from his effectiveness. he apologized for those comments. >> the apology accepted by the ambassador. >> but he -- the question that has been raised is can h
the surge in iraq. he called it the biggest foreign policy mistake. he warned it would be the biggest foreign policy mistake since vietnam. obviously the surge turned out differently. he will face tough questions about those positions if he will take the helm at the defense department. general jenna. jenna: all ahead, thank you, jennifer. jon: for more on the controversy surrounding the president's planned picks let's bring in bret stevens, foreign affairs columnist at "wall street journal." about chuck hagel first. it is a quote that sounds familiar to you and you wrote it. before his official nomination, mr. obama may appoint mr. hagel to take a place at the pentagon. as almost score setting matter i almost hope he does. it would confirm a point i made earlier this column earlier this year, that mr. obama is not a friend of israel. >> you could hardly think of another leading contender for that position who would be, who would raise more eyebrows than chuck hagel when it comes to israel. you heard earlier jennifer griffin quoting the line about the jewish lobby, which is interesting
? what's nuttier? a walnut farm or washington. speaking of foreign policy advisor -- wh? whoo -- >> i'll just get up and leave. >> believe me, that was nicer than heilemann at the 6:00 hour. i called him the newman of the show. he's gone. i'm sorry. the people on twitter are with you. they say it's not show. >> richard and i are here for the best dressed segment, the two guys that were just here. >> no, i don't think you are. but you might be. you have a nice new tie on. you went in there and what happened? >> friends of the show -- >> gave you a tie. >> you look dapper. dan, you look okay, too. >> wow! >> caught pulitzer prize winning columnist, msnbc political analyst, eugene robinson is always handsome. >> glad to be on your good side this morning. >> good to have you on. we will have general stanley mcchrystal coming up on the next half hour and michael bloomberg coming up in the next hour of "morning joe." president obama's choices for his second term national security team are taking shape. former republican senator check hagel, a decorated soldier and vietnam veteran has been t
, various of his colleagues, republican senators, had a very high view of his foreign policy credentials, including senate republican leader mitch mcconnell. now that he's actually been tapped by this democraticed a m, they have some problems and they have to check into his record. even a guy that was one of them before, once he is blessed by president obama is persona nongrata among the congressional republicans. they're going to have a tough time i think making the case against chuck hagel who was twice wounded in vietnam as an enlisted man going up against the chicken hawks of the united states senate, and he's not going to take a lot of grief from them. he's a guy who has bled for his country and actually believes that war should be a last resort. it's a novel sentiment perhaps in the senate these days, but i think it will prevail. >> it certainly is. as the president said, war is not an abstraction to this man. ken, you recently reported that several anti-obama groups are going to try to make these nomination battles as permanent as debt ceiling battles. who is it that's behind this
of hagel's nomination to the defense department and dan seymour and foreign policy adviser. gentlemen, welcome to you both. i couldn't think of two better people to do this and you both agreed. so, thank you. dan, i want to start with you, but i want to lay out this issue on israel and iran and i want to put up, we put together a few charts. sort of fuel for supporters and opponents when it comes to hagel and iran and israel. voted against iran/libya sanks in 2001 and blocked sanctions bills in 2008. he was in support of key nonproliferation bills having to do with sanctioning iran on nuclear weapons. as for israel, he didn't sign some letters of support of israel in the past. anti-hamas bill and voted for aid for israel as a senator. dan, why would you look at this record and say it's decidedly mixed for somebody who want somebody in there who wants nothing but always on the side of whatever israel wants the united states to do, he certainly is not a full fledged opponent of israel, is he not? >> first of all, an american hero and even those of us opposed to his nomination salute him
approach to foreign policy. there is discussion whether that would be enough to scuttle his nomination. they are prepared to put a lot of political capital behind his nomination. usually when they do that, they are able to get the nomination through the process. host: we heard from senator john mccain. he put out a statement right away. tell us about that. guest: senator mccain is being cautious. he is concerned with some of the things he has done and said, especially concerning israel. he has previously called him a close personal friend. he is a vietnam veteran. they served together in the senate. they do know each other. there is a level of comedy and respect between senators. -- i do not think that john mccain knows what he is going to do. i think the hearings in congress and in the media will lead an impact on the final results. host: we are asking our viewers to tell us what they think are the foreign-policy challenges in 2013. what does he face if he were to get the nomination? guest: he will have a range of foreign-policy challenges. we are talking about a military that is tire
doubts about his foreign policy and. it was natural for him to pick then-senator clinton to be secretary of state. i think in a second term, he is not running for reelection. he is more inclined to pick somebody he is comfortable with. the gun along in the senate, so presumably they will get along in it administrations -- they got along in the senate, so presumably they will get along in the administration. i think the fundamental reason, senator hagel, he and the president are in lock step. one of the things it should be done in the hearings for the nomination, and the things about american power and leadership, it is fine to talk about the limits of power. everyone should understand hard limits to power. i think that issue, that debate can be used fully put on the table when senator hagel is before committees. host: whopper we dig the life and careewe dig into the lr of senator chuck hagel. i want to point out a "that is beginning a lot of attention. -- quote that has been gettin ga lot og a lot of attention. "the jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here," referring to capitol
including those in the jewish community. the defense establishment and foreign policy circles. hagel has apologized for the tone of his opposition in 1998 to an openly gay ambassadorial candidate. he called him, quote, openly aggressively gay but now calls that characterization, quote, insensitive. joining me is margaret hoover. and peter bynart, editor of the daily beast. you helped start a group opposed to senator hagel's nomination. what are your problems with him? >> well, which i'm actually not involved with anymore, but i understand the perspective of them. there are a lot of folks who have concerns about some of the things hagel has said in the past and that's why we'll have a full -- >> specifically about israel? >> specifically about israel, specifically about iran. it's not just what he said. he has a very long voting record of not taking voting positions or even signing letters that suggest a stalwart supporter of israel. >> but he has voted for tens of millions of dollars in foreign aid to israel. >> certainly. he is not a neoisolationist. by any means. he is in favor of fore
: but on foreign policy, which he was least experienced in, seems to, in the judgement of military people i've talked to, have been best. bob gates on this program said to me had the decisional making talent of people that i have rarely seen. so did general mccraven. he said i have seen people in the military for 40 years that didn't handle decisions as well as he does. >> no, it was a revelation to he moochlt he's been my friend as i mentioned for a long time. but you never know exactly how people are going to handle these things until you see them. one of the things about that long campaign, though, is what you-- you began to see elements of that. and you know, even on foreign policy, i was thinking about this the other day. we, our campaign began to take off in the summer of 2007 after we had been in a deep hole. when in a series of debates he took some foreign policy decisions that were very distinctive and created quite a bit of controversy. one was he said if i have a high value target al qaeda target in pakistan, i'm going to go after that target. you know, i want the cooperation of
based on the agenda you're seeing or a caution one? >> reporter: focusing on foreign policy, i think you'd have to say this is a confident president obama right now. just consider the selections of chuck hagel, john kerry, even though it's not susan rice, but also john brennan compared to four years ago. jim jones did not work out. there was secretary gates at defense that was brought over from the bush administration before him. and so i think in many ways this sort of demonstrates that the president feels he'll put his imprint on foreign policy going forward from him. hillary clinton a choice that some may have viewed as a concession of secretary of state and worked out well for both sides. >> david, you know, chuck hagel has gotten some opposition from the left and the right. do you expect in a second term now elected and safe obama might get some more opposition from the left, from democrats? i'm thinking maybe on drones or extra judicial killing or some of the things that maybe some liberals had been quieter on waiting for obama to get re-elected? >> i think that's definitely a big
that happens well he is a lie that has a very important impact on his foreign-policy is the assassination of the president of south vietnam from our client, our allies for there. and then two weeks later kennedy himself was assassinated. as you were saying before, this raised the question that the story cannot pro league we will keep arguing about for the next 50 years, with kennedy have wanted said -- would he have pull that american troops out of vietnam, the advisers of a vietnam if he did not have troops in great numbers are, combat troops. and you argue, think, that indications are that he would have. you cite various sources about that. just curious, just to challenge that little bit, there's a wonderful book by a historian called choosing war in which she says that the viet cong attacks were doubling in november from the month before, south vietnam, and that there were meetings of kennedy's top but pfizer's in honolulu which finished up just a data for kennedy was assassinated. this could be a great film. and evidently burgling to win if the u.s. did not do something very quickly.
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 298 (some duplicates have been removed)